Tuesday, November 15, 2005

Fake, But Accurate; The Same, Only Different

Rathergate continues to echo through the MSM, as sacked CBS producer and Rather lackey Mary Mapes continues to flog her less-than-truthful new book on the PR circuit. Now some of her friends are attacking Power Line, one of the conservative blogs that outed Rather's and Mapes' blatant attempt to smash George Bush at the polls with damning documents that were obvious forgeries...er, documents that were "inauthentic." Power Line's Scott Johnson elaborates on a major verbal arabesque in the disappointing, but somewhat accurate, Thornburgh Report:

It's true that the Report avoids stating a definitive conclusion that the documents are fakes; it merely endorses Peter Tytell's analysis that the documents are "inauthentic." It does so on page 175. This is a little-known fact that simply hasn't penetrated the mainstream media reporting on the Mapes fraud. If the documents are inauthentic -- if they are not what they purport to be -- they are fakes.

If the Thornburgh Report finds Tytell's analysis regarding the inauthenticity of the documents to be "sound," as it does on page 175, the only rational conclusion one can draw is that the documents are fakes. But ratiocination is a commodity in short supply among members of the alternate-reality based community.

Wonker is reminded of an early Cheech and Chong movie where Cheech is trying to draw an analogy for the perpetually drug-hazed Tommy Chong. Cheech says, "You know, it's the same, only different." We would guess that this about sums up the continued defense of obviously fake or forged documents by clinging to the word "inauthentic" which fuzzes the issue. Fake but accurate. The same only different. It depends on what the definition of "is" is.

Johnson gets it right. The left really does inhabit an alternative, parallel universe.

But this story also resonates with our longer observations from yesterday and helps bolster our major point. Words do matter. The left has mastered the fine art of employing verbal nuance to turn reality on its head, to take the prudence out of jurisprudence, to "constitutionally" eliminate religion from public discourse, and to eviscerate admirable American cultural traditions. Our first step in taking these things back from the left is to take our language back. We'll be doing that here a lot in the coming months.